The Orthodox Church and Byelorussian people
Mironowicz Antoni
Identity and Tolerance as Understood by the Ortodox Monks from Supraśl in the 16th Century
In the 16-th century the monastery of Suprasl was the second monastic center of the Orthodox Church in the Polish Republic after the Kiev-Caves Monastery. This monastery was founded in 1498 by the Novogrod Voivod and Marshall of the Great Duchy of Lithuania — Alexander Khadkevich together with Smolensk Archbishop — Joseph Soltan. In the history of the Byelorussian culture the monastery in Suprasl occupies unique place. The best achievements of many branches of culture have been concentrated in it. They mirror close contacts with the religious and cultural heritage of other Slavonic nations. The monastery became a place of the reciprocal permeating of various religious trends. Also here, many national cultures influenced each other. An example of this reciprocal permeating of cultures was the architecture and interior decorations of the Annunciation monastery church. The uniqueness of the architecture of this building consists in the mixing of the Gothic and Byzantine styles. The construction of this object resembled the fortified style of architecture of the churches in Polotsk, Synkovitche and Malomozsheykov.
The direct connections of Suprasl with Byzantine and Serbian culture may be proved by the monumental frescos in the Annunciation Church. They were painted by a group of painters under the supervision of Nektorius the Serb (Serb Nekhtarioosh). These frescos were a testimony to dogmatic Orthodoxy. The openness of the Suprasl clergy for new religious and cultural trends is testified to by voluminous positions in the monastery library which possessed 587 volumes in 1645. Among them was the “Minieja Czetnaja” (Minnheya Tshetnaya) tracing its origins back to the beginning of the 11-th century, containing the lives of Bulgarian, Serbian, Russian and other Slavonic saints. The religious and cultural identity of Suprasl monks was revealed in the interest they found in the Old Russian history. In the monastery library also “The Chronicle of Kiev and Novogrod” was preserved together with many Byelorussian and Lithuanian annals chronicles (the so called “latopisy”).
The monastery of Suprasl was visited by many outstanding writers, religious leaders and political notables. This monastery was also visited by Matsiey Stryjkovsky — the author of “The Polish-Lithuanian chronicle", by the Patriarch of Constantinople — Jeremiash, the Serbian and Bulgarian patriarch — Gabriel, and many other Church dignitaries from abroad. Outstanding lay and Church notables were buried in the monastery tombs. In the 16-th century, the monastery of Suprasl became a major ecclesiastical center of all the Slavic nations. The monastery while being the major center of Orthodox theological thought, still remained open for new trends in philosophical thought. The monks from Suprasl, while not compromising their identity, addressed other denominations and cultures with tolerance. This may be the reason why the best achievements of the various branches of culture were represented in the monastery of Suprasl. Here also, the contacts with the culture of other nations was such, that their best achievements were effectively passed on to succeeding generations. The monastery of Suprasl is a good example of the 16-th century Polish-Republic — the motherland of many nations, denominations and cultures.
THE PROBLEM OF AUTOCEPHALIA OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN BYELORUSSIA
The problem of autocephalia in the Orthodox Church in Byelorussia has now become more current during the period of time when the Republic has paved the way for independence. An independent structure of every Church (Orthodox or Catholic) is a symptom of the sovereignty of a country. That is way in recent years the democratic forces in Byelorussia and Byelorussian circles in exile have declared the autocephalia of the Orthodox Church in Byelorussia. Similar postulates are presented to the Catholic Church, dominated by the Polish clergy, which is relustant to the national rebirth of the Byelorussians. The russificated Orthodox Church may play an essential role in the process. The Orthodox Church is the constant and unquestionable element of the Byelorussian identity. The authorities realize it more and more clearly, especially now when they notice that the riligious revival is strictly connected with the moral and cultural rebirth of the nation. In recent years it has taken on trials of the change in the politics of the Orthodox Church authorities in Byelorussia. However, it seems that some activities are extorted by the other factors, such as: the origination of the state system, restoration of Unitarian parish, aspirations of democratic and patriotic forces for the independence from Moscow in all domains of life.
These factors desided that the Byelorussian Exarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church has gained the independent organizational structure consisting of ten bishoprics. There was also established the day of all the Byelorussian Saints. It happens on the thitd Sunday after the Quinquagesima Sunday that the Gospel according to St. Matthew was translated into Byelorussian. They intended to translate three remaining evangelical parts and the liturgy as well. The future priests studying at the Zhyrovitse Seminary can learn in their native language. Orthodox brotherhood gathering the young people and the intelligence of Byelorussia, play an important role in the national renaissance. However, these changes are not so essential that we can talk about the origin of autocephalia in the Byelorussian Orthodox Church. We can only suppose that similarly to the situation in other countries the Orthodox Church gains organizational and canonical indeoendence when the country becomes sovereign. At this moment Byelorussia is at the beginning of its road to the autonomy that is not propitious to the activity of shaping the autocephalia tendency in the Orthodox Church.
Orthodox autocephalia in Byelorussia is a centuries long tradition. Its origins derive from the tenth century when the first Polotsk bishopric was founded (approximately 992). In 1088, the Turau-Pinsk diocese came to existance and in 1136, the Smolensk[1]. The Polotsk bishopric became the centre of religious life of Belorussians. The Byelorussian Orthodox Church, from its very beginning, developing in an environment of a sovereign Byelorussian State, held these principles to be sacred, and always remained in close contact with its people. Since the early times, Byelorussian monasteries and churches were centers of education and culture. The first schools flourished at our churches and attracted the greatest scholars and teachers of the time.The Polotsk dukes politics, and especially of Vsieslav the Vizard (1044-1101) tended to create a statehood which would be independent of Kiev and Novgorod[2]. The Polotsk land was the place where the largest amount of saints existed, including three saint bishops: Myna (1105-1116), Dionyzii (1116-1187), and Symeon (1266-1289). The saint bishops contributed not only to the development of Christianity, education, and culture, but to the independence of Polotsk from the neighbars. Saint Euphrosyna (1110-1173), the foundress of the St. Spas monastery in Polotsk, became the advocate of the Byelorussian country[3]. Holy Euphrosyna of Polotsk, descendant from the House of Greek emperors Komnen, built a monastery near the city of Polotsk where she organized a school and a group of transcribers of handwritten books. Later a master artisan Lazar Bohsha was commissioned and made for her a priceless jeweled Cross, an object of widely spread reverence among Byelorussians.
The Turau diocese came into existance in the period of time, when Turau dukes, especially the duke Yaroslav Izajaslavich, tended to the independence from kiev. In the time of the highest development of Turau land, happening in the twelfth century (Yury Yaroslavich and his son Svietopelk who died approximately in 1190) the religious life was flourishing. Martin (1120-1170), the bishop Cyril (1169-1182) and the bishop Lavrenty (1182-1194) can be the proof of it. Saint Cyril of Turau became widely worshipped by the Byelorussians and other Slavic nations[4]. In the 12th century in the city of Turau appeared a distinguished theologian, excellent orator and author of prayers, St. Cyril of Turau. His fame reached far abroad, and his works and his thoroughly thought out sermons for centuries have been used by many churches in European East and South.
The origin of the Smolensk diocese, which also includes the Byelorussian ethnic territory, is connected with the activity of the duke Roscislav the Faithful (1126-1168) who aims at the sovereign country. The duke was the founder of a number of the Orthodox churches and monasteries, and was the also protector of the local church. The fundation of an independent Orthodox structure started the development of spiritual and cultural life od Smolensk land. It is worth emphasizing that Byelorussian bishoprics were included in the Kievan Metropolis, which was juridicially dependent upon Constantinopl Patriarchate. Soon afterwards on the scene of the Byelorussian Church life appeared another man of great stature, St. Auraam of Smolensk, who contributed much to the growth of the Church and strengthening of Faith with his numerous writings.
After a long period of a continued and prosperous growth, in 1240 the Byelorussian Church was faced with a problem of leadership, when the Tartars overran Kiev, forcing the "Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus" as well as the princes of Kiev to seek refuge in Suzdal. For the Byelorussian Nation a question now arose of reorganization of her Church. It was necessary for Byelorussia to create her own Metropolitanate and an independent Byelorussian Autocephalic Orthodox Church. In 1291 a first Autocephalic Metropolitan for Litva (Byelorussia) was consecrated in Constantinople. In 1316 at a Sobor in the capital city of Novahradak, the Litvanian Metropolitanate was formally created with Metropolitan Theophilos at the head. The new Church was recognized by the Patriarch of Constantinople and was assigned the 82nd place by the Ecclesiastical Synod. The Byelorussian Autocephalic Orthodox Church so created, had its own series of Metropolitans, each of whom in accordance with the Church Law, and because by this time Kiev itself belonged to the Byelorussian State, carried a title of "Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus", even though the seat of the Metropolitan was in Novahradak, the capital of Litva. The Metropolitan who fled from Kiev to Suzdal had, therefore, legally lost the right to this title.
The second stage of shaping the principles of Orthodox autocephalia took place in the period of subordinating the territory of Byelorussia to the Lithuanian dukes power. Their politics tended to the creation of an Orthodox structure independent upon Kiev, Halicz and Vlodimir on Klazma. The crowning achievement of these politics was the formation of the Lithuanian Orthodox Metropolis governed by the Metropolitan Theophilos with the seat in Novahradak during the reign of Gedymin (1315-1341). Although the Metropolis fell in 1330, it was the first time that the majority of the Byelorussian territory was in the bounds of the homogenous Orthodox structure; which was independent of other Russian metropolises. Its representatives took part in the meetings of Patriarchal Council in Carogrod in 1317, 1327, and 1329. The renewal of the Lithuanian Metropolis took place during the Olherd’s reign (1345-1377) in 1350. And in 1371, there were included the bishoprics of the Halicz Metropolis. Also, in the fifteenth century other dioceses of the Kiev Metropolis were included in the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
Around that time into the arena of history emerged Moscow. The Muscovite princes, recognizing the importance of a Metropolitan in plans for expansion of their state, but especially because of their recent conquest of the duchy of Suzdal, created a Metropolitan Seat in Moscow with the same title as that of the Byelorussian Metropolitanate — "Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus". Moscow grew ever stronger and demanded from the Patriarch of Constantnnople that the Byelorussian Metropolitanate be abolished. On the other hand the Byelorussian Grand Duke Olherd in 1363 demanded from the Patriarch that he recognize the title "Metropolitan of "Kiev and all Rus" only for his candidate, Roman. The Patriarch made a very queer decision, he conferred the same title to both Roman and Moscow's Alexis, thereby only sharpening the conflict between Byelorussia and Moscow. Metropolitan Roman soon died, and Alexis attempted to take control of the Byelorussian Church. Clearly, Grand Duke Olherd of Litva-Byelorussia was opposed to this and a new war erupted with Moscow. In order to clarify the situation, Patriarch sent into Byelorussia his own man Gregory Tsamblak, who soon after the death of Alexis in 1375, was named by the Patriarch the Byelorussian Metropolitan. Thus the Byelorussian Church emerged triumphant, but not not for long.
After the death of Kipriyan, and under the influence of Moscow, the Patriarch sent Fotsius as the "Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus". Fotsius preferred the centralized Moscow rather than the democratic Byelorussia. He first began to defend Moscow and later moved there, completely neglecting the Church in Byelorussia. The Byelorussian Grand Duke Vitaut, and the Byelorussian Bishops demended from the Patriarch, to correct the situation and to name a new Byelorussian Metropolitan Gregory Tsamblak, a relative of the deceased Metropolitan Kipriyan. The Patriarch remained silent. After two more requests to the Patriarch went unanswered, Vitaut called in 1415 Sobor in the city of Novahradak, where Gregory Tsamblak was elected unanimously the Byelorussian Metropolitan. This act clearly illustrates the will of the Byelorussian people to have their own Byelorussian Church. In 1420 Metropolitan Gregory died, and Fotsius began attempts to gain control of the Byelorussian Metropolitanate. However at this time the Patriarch named Bishop Herasym the Byelorussian Metropolitan, thereby undermining Moscow's attempts. The favor of Almighty toward the Byelorussian Church was evident as the Holy Mother of God appeared in person in the cities of Mensk and Smolensk, and as a miraculous Icon in Zhyrovitsy.
Moscow was opposed to Herasym, and sent to Patriarch its own candidate, bishop lona, for the title of "Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus". At this time the Byzantine Empire was in a difficult position due to attacks by Turks, and both the Emperor and the Patriarch looked to the Pope of Rome for aid, and were prepared for a Union with Rome in return for that aid. For this reason the Patriarch sent to Byelorussia and to Moscow his own representative Isydor, who began a campaign in favor of the union with Rome. Later he went to Ferary-Florence to attend a Sobor concerned with the question of such union, and upon his return attempted to settle in Moscow, but was refused there and left.
In 1448 Moscow appointed lona as its own Metropolitan in spite of the opposition to such an appointment by the Patriarch. This act represents the beginning of the uncanonical structure and position of the Russian Autocephalic Orthodox Church because of the break with the Patriarch of Constantinople. Patriarch Denys was extremely displease'd with Moscow, and therefore after the death of Isydor, he appointed Bishop Gregory as the "Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus", which included Moscow. For the same reason the Patriarch refused to recognize Moscow's candidate Theodosey as a successor to lona.
In 1458, the Muscovitan Metropolitans officially renounced the title of the Kievan Metropolitans[5]. In 1473 Bishop Michael of Smolensk was elected the Metropolitan in Byelorussia. His successors were Bishop Symon, Bishop lona of Polotsk, and Bishop Makary of Vilnya, all of whom were confirmed by 'the Patriarch as Byelorussian Metropolitans.
One of the reasons for this close relation of the Patriarch to the Byelorussian Autocephalic Orthodox Church was the self-appointment by the Tsar Ivan III of Moscow as the "Defender of all Rus", and as the ruler of the Church. Furthermore, at this time in Moscow began to spread a doctrine of "Third Rome", which. obviously was not kindly received by the Patriarch. Therefore the friendly relations of the Patriarchs to the Byelorussian Church continued for a long time, up to 1596, the year of the Union with Rome in Brest Litouski.
From 1458, to the time of the Brest union Byelorussian bishoprics (Polotsk, Turau, Smolensk, and a part of the Metropolis ) belonged to the independent Kievan Metropolis; and they had large autonomy. In this fruitful period Dr Francisk Skoryna, the first Byelorussian publisher of printed books, translated the Bible into Byelorussian and published it in Prague in 1517. Later, in 1525, in Vilnya he published the "Traveler's Prayerbook" and other religious books.
In the meantime, Moscow, which took a course of opposition to the Patriarch, continued to be extremely hostile toward the Byelorussian Church, and awaited for an appropriate moment to attack Byelorussia and to destroy the Byelorussian Orthodox Church. Such aggression began in 1514. Moscow occupied Smolensk and immediately annexed the Smolensk Diocesis to the Muscovite Church. The disregard and breaking of the Canonic Laws continued, and eventually by means of a physical force, Moscow was able to attain some of its aims. In 1589 Moscow created its own Patriarchate.
Unfortunately, and especially at that time, after the Union of some Byelorussian Bishops with Rome in Brest Litovsky in 15%, Polish Catholicism, acting through the Jesuits, brought havoc and near ruin to the Byelorussian Church by forcing many of the Orthodox Faith to accept either Roman Catholicism or union with Rome. During this time Apanas of Brest was persecuted and murdered by the Jesuits because of his Orthodox Faith, and became a martyr of the Byelorussian Church. Under constant attacks from Catholicism, the Byelorussian Church began to decline. This gave Moscow another opportunity to act in "Defense of the Orthodox Faith".
To defend the Byelorussian Church from Catholicism, numerous Brotherhoods arose in such cities as Vilnya, Polotsk, Vitsebsk, Mohylev, Orsha, Slutsk, Brest Litovsky, and others. Even though these Brotherhoods accomplished much, they were unable to properly oppose the action of Jesuits who were supported by Rome and Warsaw. The union made it possible for Catholics and unionists to begin a systematic seizure of the Orthodox churches, monasteries, and other Church property. Church property not completely taken over was often rented to the merchants and Jews.
Due to the continuing high level of Catholic terror the Orthodox Church in Byelorussia and the Ukraine eventually remained without bishops. Some aid came from Patriarch Teophan of Jerusalem, who in 1620, under proteo tion of Cossacks, in Kiev appointed Yov Boretsky as Metropolitan, and consecrated Archbishop Melety Smotrytsky for the Diocesie of Polotsk, and Bishop Auraam for the Diocese of Pinsk[6].
The loss of autonomy of the Orthodox Church in Byelorussiasia took place after the Brest union, when it became the targed of the Uniats attacks and a matter of interest of the Moscovian Patriarchate. In 1635, according to the decree of Ladislaus (Vladyslav) IV, the Orthodox Church lost its bishoprics: Polotsk, Brest, Turau – Pinsk ones for the benefit of the Uniate Church. In 1656, the bishopric of Smolensk together with all the territory was incorporated into Moscow. As a result, the Byelorussian territory was subordinated to the Kievan Metropolitans and since 1635, to the Mstsislav’s bishop[7]. This bishopric survived till 1772 and was named to the Mstsislav-Vitsebsk-Orsha (Byelorussian).
In the years 1632-1648, under King Ladislaus (Vladyslav) IV Vaza, Poland was engaged in a war with Moscow. Therefore, at this time, Vaza tried to moderate the Catholic terror against the Orthodox population, but as soon as the war ended successfully, he reinstituted the terror, more intense than ever. Throughout Byelorussia, not only were the Orthodox churches and monasteries systematically closed and confiscated, but it even was forbidden for them to exist. Under the circumstances it is difficult to condemn Bohdan Khmelnytsky for surrendering to Moscow. Now strengthened by Cossacks, Moscow could easily pillage Byelorussia and to annex Byelorussian Dioceses to the Muscovite Church. During the next 30-40 years of constant aggression from Moscow, only one fifth of the Byelorussian population remained alive.
In the meantime, under pressure from Rome, Poland apparently completely lost her administrative judgment and foresight. Even the Cossack uprisings under the leadership of Bohdan Khmelnytsky could not arouse her to the reality of the situation. In 1654 Bohdan Khmelnytsky was forced to seek alliance and to come under hand of Moscow. This gave Moscow an immediate possibility to commence its bloody march into Byelorussia and the Ukraine, and eventually to conquer Poland itself[8].
At this time Moscow was already strong, and it attained its goals in Constantinople. In 1686 the Patriarch of Constantinople annexed Byelorussian and Ukrainian Orthodox Church to Moscow. In this manner the Muscovite Church was established in Byelorussia and the Ukraine. Furthermore, through its ambassador to Warsaw, Moscow now began. to openly dictate terms both to Poland and to Byelorussia. It was soon to be the end of the two countries as sovereign states. In 1772 came the first partition of Byelorussia and Poland among Moscow, Prussia, and Austria-Hungary, in 1793 the second and in 1795 the third and final partition. All Byelorussia, except for the districts of Bialystok and Suvalki, was annexed to Moscow. The Byelorussian Orthodox Church ceased to exist not on the basis of a Church or Canonical Law, but only by the reason of a physical force.
The partitions of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, being one of two components of the Polish Commonwelth, caused the subordination of the Byelorussian Orthodox Church to the Russian Church. For the Orthodox people of the Grand Duchy was the formation of the new diocese of Mensk in 1796[9]. The erection of the diocese of Mensk being one of the most important fact on the road to Byelorussian Church organization.
Now began an intense russification of the Orthodox Church in Byelorussia. Byelorussian language was forbidden, all Byelorussian books were destroyed, at the head of almost every parish only Russian priests were permitted, and all higher clergy, except one bishop, was exclusively of Russian descent. The Russian Orthodox Church was an uncamouflaged weapon of the Muscovite Tsars, who, especially since Peter the 1st, considered themselves heads of Church, and directed it for their personal gain irrespective and in spite of the Canonical Law.
Byelorussian intelligentsia was systematically destroyed, the Byelorussian people were in a new and most oppressive slavery. However, the nation did not surrender spiritually, and when Napoleon took the city of Mohylev, the residing Archbishop Varlaam restored the Byelorussian Orthodox Church. Later at his trial the chief witness against Varlaam accused him by saying; "Archbishop Varlaam often told us, the clergy, that we already have our own Byelorussian Metropolitanate." The verdict was easily predictable — Archbishop Varlaam was murdered in a monastery.
In the years 1863—1864 Kastus Kalinovsky led an armed uprising against Russia and fought for Byelorussian independence. His ideas reached the very roots of the Byelorussian nation, and later, especially after 1905 when the Tsar was forced to permit use of the Byelorussian language in press, these ideas brought fruit and helped to grow a series of poets, journalists, novelists, and leaders for liberation of Byelorussia[10].
After the fall of the Russian Empire in 1917, there were two conceptions of the rebirth of the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church which derived from both secular and spiritual circles. On March 25, 1918, Byelorussian Rada (Council) proclaimed the Byelorussian National Republic a free and independent state. Unfortunately, after three years of struggle, the Byelorussian National Republic was conquered by the Russian Communists. The Byelorussian Church, however, proved to be a more difficult conquest. On July 23, 1922, a congress of clergymen and believers of the Metropolis was held in Mensk. The Metropolitan bishop Melkhisedek (Payeusky) presided over that congress. The final decision of the congress was a transformation of the Mensk Metropolis into the Byelorussian Orthodox Church. In 1927, the same Metropolitan Melkhisedek summoned a local convention that consisted of bishops, the clergy, and worshippers of entire Byelorussia (means the territory that was a part of the USSR) and announced creation of the Byelorussian Orthodox Autocephalian Church. It broke all the forms of dependence upon the Russian Church. The realization of decisions of the Byelorussian local council faced firm resistance of the Byelorussian authorities and the Russian Church. Since 1927, the Bolsheviks persecuted all independent and national tendencies including aspirations for autocephalia by the Orthodox Church. At the same time, three new bishops were consecrated: Nicholas of Slutsk, Ioan of Mozyr, and Filaret of Bobruysk. Shortly after the local convention, in 1927, the Metropolitan Melkhisedek along with other priests was arrested and tortured to death by the Bolsheviks[11], and that the same fate awaited bishops Nicholas and Ioan, still on the 9-10 of August 1927, Bishop Filaret called the second Sobor of the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church, which likewise unanimously confirmed the independence of the Byelorussian Orthodox Church. As Bishop Filaret said, this course is canonically legal and historically necessary (34, 37 Apostolic - Rules, and 9th Rule of Antyoch. Sobor). The Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church continued its existence until 1932 when it was totally liquidated by Red Moscow. The casualties of the terror that followed were enormous. All our churches, numbering 2500 and 23 monasteries, were closed — many destroyed. Over 2000 clergy, over one million of the faithful, and nearly all of Byelorussian patriotic intelligentsia were arrested, deported or executed[12].
In 1942, there was another comeback to the idea of the autocephalia. The German occupation authorities permitted them to organize the synodal assembly of the Byelorussian Orthodox Church in which six bishops, priests and elected delegates of different parishes participated. On August 30, 1942, unanimously restored the Byelorussian Metropolitanate with Metropolitan Panteleimon at its head. Panteleimon, being himself a Russian, and bishop Benedykt were not sincerely interested in the Byelorussian Orthodox Church, and were bearing it temporarily. The other Bishops - Filatey, Venyamin, Apanas and Stephan, even though themselves Byelorussians, followed the first two. This assembly reactivated the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church with seven bishoprics depending derectly on the Constantynopl Patriarchate. The Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church had a great influence on the Byelorussian society and caused the renaissance of religious life. After the liberation of Byelorussia, all Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church parishes were subordinated to the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate. The hierarchy of the Autocephalian Orthodox Church together with the Metropolitan Panteleimon emigrated, and a number of worshippers and clergy followed them. Those who remained died in the Bolshevik concentration camps[13].
In 1946, activist engaged in religious life in exile, summoned the synodal assembly in Germany and established the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church. This assembly decided to combine the Byelorussian Orthodox Church with the Russian Church, so called „Zarubezhna”. The decision of the assembly was not accepted by all the emigration activists. The Ukrainian Autocephalic Orthodox Church under the head of Metropolitan Polikarp, permitted one of its bishops, Bishop Sergey, to take under his care the orphaned Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church. On June 5, 1948, Bishop Sergey called a Sobor in Constance, where the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church was again restored, and a decision to consecrate a Byelorussian Bishop was made. Accordingly, on December 19, 1949, in Rosenheim, (Germany) Archimandrite Vasil was consecrated Bishop by three Ukrainian bishops. On January 19th, 1949, Vasil, the first bishop of new Byelorussian structure, was ordained. Again having its own Sobor of Bishops, the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church was formally and canonically reinstated.
In 1968 two more bishops were consecrated in Australia— Andrew of Cleveland, and Nicholas of Toronto. At present the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church has its own Sacred Sobor consisting of four Bishops, and parishes over most of the Free World - in the USA, Canada, England, Belgium and Australia. In the USA the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church is incorporated in the State of New York under Section 18 of the Religious Corporation Law. Australia is the seat of the Head of the Church, Archbishop Sergey, and New York is the seat of the Ruling Bishop in America and Canada, Archbishop Vasil.
At present, the parishes that belong to the Byelorussian Autocephalian Orthodox Church are governed by two Metropolitans: Nicholas (Martsinkievich) and Izaslav (Brutsky). The parishes of this church exists in the USA, Canada, Greit Britain, and Australia[14].
All the presented facts show that the trials of creation of the Autocephalian Orthodox Church in Byelorussia were taken up in the past. The Church on of emigration has existed since 1948. Will it be created in the Byelorussian Republic? It will depend upon many factors; but mainly upon the will of worshippers, the Byelorussian clergy and the factual state of sovereignty of the country.
[1] F.A. Sapunov, Istoricheskije sud’by Polotskoj eparkhi s drevnieszikh wremen do połowiny XIX weka, Vitsebsk 1889; A. Poppe, L’organisation docésaine de la Russie aux XI-XII siécles, in „Byzantion” 40 (1970), ppp. 165-217; D. Blażejowskyj, Hierarchy of the Kyivan Church (861-1990), Romae 1990; G. Szeikin, Połotskaja eparkhija ot drevnisti do naszikh dniej, Mińsk 1997.
[2]V. E. Danilevich, Ocherki istorii Poltskoj zemli do kontsa XIV stoletija, Kiev 1896; L. V. Aleksejev, Polotskaja zemlja, Moscow 1966.
[3] A. Nadson, The Life of Euphrosyne of Połock, „The Journal of Byelorussian Studie”, vol. II, nr. 1, year V, London 1969, pp. 3-24;
[4] G. P. Fedotov, Sviatyie drevnej Rusi, Paris 1931, pp. 225-230; A. Nadson, The Writings of Svol. Cyril of Turaú, „The Journal of Byelorussian Studie”, vol. II, nr. 1, year I, London 1965, pp. 4-14; A. A. Melnikov, Put’ nepechalen, Mensk 1992, pp. 17-74; A. Mironowicz, Kult Swiatykh na Biełarusi, „Voice of Time”, nr 6 (21), London 1992, pp. 1-10.
[5] Mitropolit Makarii, Istoriia Russkoii Tserkvi, vol. VI, S. Peterburg 1886, pp. 41-97; M. Hrushevsky, Istoriia Ukrainy-Rusi, vol. V, Kiev 1905, pp. 100-179; K. Chodynicki, Kościół prawosławny a Rzeczpospolita Polska 1370-1632, Warszawa 1934, pp. 3-72; T. Trajdos, Metropolici kijowscy Cyprian i Grzegorz Camblak a problem cerkwi prawosławnej w państwie polsko-litewskim u schyłku XIV i w pierwszej połowie XV w., „Balcanica Posnaniensia”, vol. II, 1985, pp. 211-233.
[6] A. Mironowicz, Kościół prawosławny w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej, Białystok 2001, pp. 69-96.
[7] A. Mironowicz, Orthodoxy and Uniatism During the 17th Century, [in:] Churches and Confessions in East Central Europe in Early Modern Times, ed. H. Łaszkiewicz, Lublin 1999, pp. 74-77.
[8] See: A. Mironowicz, Prawosławie i unia za panowania Jana Kazimierza, Białystok 1997.
[9] Ch. Sipovich, The Diocese of Mensk, its origin, Extent and Hierarchy, „The Journal of Byelorussian Studie”, vol. II, nr. 2, Year VI, London 1970, pp. 177-191;
[10] Byelorussian Autocephalic Orthodox Church [in:] Byelorussian Orthodox Calendar for 1970, Cleveland 1969, pp. 75.
[11] See: I. Kasjak, Z historyi Prawasłaúnaj Tsarkvy Belaruskaha narodu, New York 1956, pp. 37-72. I. Kasiak, Byelorussia. Historical Outline, London 1989, pp. 164-167; Arch. Afanasij Martos, Belaruś w istoricheskoj, gosudarstvienoj i tserkovnoj zhiźni, Buenos-Aires 1966, pp. 257-267.
[12] Byelorussian Autocephalic Orthodox Church [in:] Byelorussian Orthodox Calendar for 1970, pp. 75-76.
[13] I. Kasiak, Byelorussia. Historical Outline, pp. 225-227.
[14] I. Kasjak, Z historyi...,pp. 73-170; Arch. Afanasi Martos, Belarus.., pp. 257-292; R. Roberson, The Eastern Christian Churches, Roma 1990, pp. 75-76.